Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

“I don’t like to borrow to fund deficits”

Posted in:

Illinois

* Gov. Rauner’s press conferences are almost always sweet bloggy goodness goldmines. For instance, he said this yesterday…

“I don’t like to borrow to fund deficits,” Rauner said.

* Galia Slayen at the Pritzker campaign…

If Bruce Rauner doesn’t like to borrow to fund deficits, then he shouldn’t create them. Rauner manufactured a 736-day budget crisis on the backs of Illinois children and families and his damage is done.

posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:35 am

Comments

Pritzker response is pitch perfect.

Comment by pawn Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:39 am
I prefer to stiff creditors and destroy suppliers.

Comment by Last Bull Moose Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:41 am
“I don’t like to borrow to fund deficits…except from the
Vendors I contract with” fixed it

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:42 am
He’s borrowed nearly $12B from unwilling vendors in less than three years.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:42 am
Governor Rauner, the bills have got to be paid. You can’t ignore them away. What needs to be done, needs to be done. Do your job, and pay the bills.

Comment by Retired Educator Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:44 am
And what exactly does he think he’s been doing with $16 billion in unpaid bills. We pay interest, penalties and fees. Gosh, kind of sounds like borrowing.

Comment by Chicago Cynic Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:44 am
“I don’t like providing state services without getting paid.” — businesses across Illinois.

Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:45 am
He doesn’t like to do anything but create deficits that harms Illinoisans for his personal political gain.

Comment by VanillaMan Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:46 am
==on the backs of Illinois children and families and his damage is done.==

I beg to differ, the damage continues every day he is in the office.

Comment by Gruntled University Employee Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:46 am
Yeah. Paying what we owe is such a downer. We are borrowing to pay for actual incurred debt.

Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:47 am
Seems he would prefer to tell Human Service providers to do their own borrowing for services providing to his administration.

After they can no longer borrow additional funds, he would prefer they burn through their reserves. lay off staff and cut programs.

Comment by Give Me A Break Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:47 am
“I don’t like to borrow to fund deficits,” Rauner said.

He’d much rather discharge his debt through bankruptcy.

Paying bills is for suckers.

Comment by Henry Francis Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:49 am
Rauner’s governing created deficits that now could be addressed with borrowing to help where Rauner decided to hurt.

Diana Rauner said it best;

It was a business decision… as JB Pritzker, and his family’s trust got $5 million to The Ounce… and Diana thanked them for helping while Bruce was squeezing the beast.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:53 am
“I don’t like to borrow to fund deficits” I’d rather blame Madigan.

Comment by Skeptic Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:54 am
Weren’t the unpaid bills less than 5 million when he took Office?

But this is not his fault. Now I understand.

Comment by illini Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:57 am
Galia Slayen slayed with that statement. *nudge nudge* Get it?

Anyways, I think so far Pritzker’s shop has had the most effective messaging. It rivals what the old Rauner Crew used to do. Rauner’s really going to miss his old shop if Pritzker gets to the General.

Comment by Chicago_Downstater Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:58 am
===“I don’t like to borrow to fund deficits,” Rauner said.===

Bruce, are you suggesting the bond proceeds will be used for new spending, while leaving the backlog untouched? Thats “baloney”.

Any businessman knows, its better to pay 3% or 4% interest, than 12%. Thats a certainty. The savings is there for the taking.

A budget imbalance of $2 bil is a different matter, and should be addressed head on. But rauner opposes anything that helps improve the situation. Borrowing bad. Tax increase bad. Shutter universities, not so bad. Junk bond status, not so bad. Starve the beast.

Comment by Langhorne Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 9:58 am
Bruce Rauner took a budget situation that was very problematic and turned it into a full blown crisis with his own actions. He saw a dumpster fire; proceeded to throw gasoline on it and roll it down a hill at the underprivileged when he should have been throwing water on it for the benefit of everyone.

Comment by Ducky LaMoore Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:02 am
===If Bruce Rauner doesn’t like to borrow to fund deficits, then he shouldn’t create them. Rauner manufactured a 736-day budget crisis on the backs of Illinois children and families and his damage is done.===

This is textbook. This is “Pattersonian”.

Not much needed to add, cut down to its essence.

Well said.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:12 am
==Rauner manufactured a 736-day budget crisis on the backs of Illinois children and families and his damage is done.==

Those would be the same backs carrying the burden of the income tax hike.

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:17 am
What bull…the question is not whether to borrow or not, but do you borrow from bankers in the business of lending, who charge a much lower interest rate; or do you borrow from vendors, who are not in the business of lending, and charge a much higher interest rate. A no brainer for anyone but Rauner…and I this guy was supposed be a great businessman!

Comment by Johnny Justice Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:18 am
Dont worry everyone, the old fiscal conservative has a plan.

Comment by Blue dog dem Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:19 am
===Those would be the same backs carrying the burden of the income tax hike.===

… that was seen by everyone who honesty looked at numbers as a necessary.

Rauner also refused, and his staff and agency heads, to name cuts. So there’s that too.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:25 am
— ” Shutter universities, not so bad. Junk bond status, not so bad. Starve the beast.” —

And the list could go on.

Comment by illini Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:36 am
Given the reckless financial destruction of our state, is there some legal issue to remove this governor so we can get some representative of citizens at the head of the state?

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:37 am
NO CZ, the income tax is spread among all.

The chronic deadbeatism and deficits you favor places the burden on the relatively few.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:38 am
Right now the State isn’t paying down the debt backlog. And they will be paying 12% interest on it from now until forever.

The State can float $6B in new bonds to pay off $6B of current debt. It’s not new debt, just refinanced debt. Most likely the interest will drop from 12% to 4%. If you do the math, that is a interest expense reduction of $480M. Rauner says the new bonds will have an annual payment of about $500M; looks to me like the refinance will pay for itself … and eventually pay off that $6B of (now bond) debt, something the current status quo will not do.

Add into that the fact the State would he dumping $6B of cash into the State economy. If it is like most cash, that will have a multiplier effect. And some of that cash out will end up as business income or possibly payroll, and be taxed. All of that would be good economic news for the State economy. It would be almost like free money for the State.

So why won’t Rauner issue the bonds? I can only think of a couple of reasons.

1) He wants to keep starving the Social Services beast until only the big corporate entities are left. Then those corporate entities will be in a monopoly position and can charge the State / Feds more.

2) Bonding that $6B converts it to hard debt that must be paid. The current situation is softer debt that the State can continue to defer. It used to be (and still partially true) that the State pension funds were the piggy bank to cover budget shortfall; the last few years the Social Services agencies have taken over that role.

3) Maybe Rauner still has dreams of State bankruptcy. In bankruptcy, secured creditors like bondholders usually get mostly paid; unsecured creditors like vendors often get little of nothing. He would probably prefer to try to write off $15B, not $9B.

Given the history of this country, I’m assuming State bankruptcy is off the table. From where I sit, Rauner’s actions on the bonds are not in the best interest of the State. They are, however, in the best interest of the wealthy 1.4% who may someday get hit by a progressive income tax.

There is one great truth about taxes that any CPA will recite: taxes deferred are taxes saved. The more I think about it while writing this, Rauner’s entire disfunctional term in office may be nothing more that deliberate action to delay any new taxes and delay any action for a progressive income tax.

Comment by RNUG Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:44 am
@Anonymous 10:37 -

Theoretically? Yes. Practically? No.

I think the word is still banned here, though.

Comment by JoanP Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:48 am
== Given the reckless financial destruction of our state, is there some legal issue to remove this governor so we can get some representative of citizens at the head of the state? ==

Three possible actions, only one real possibility:

1) impeachment by the General Assembly where there probably aren’t enough votes to actually do it

2) recall by the voters which has impossibly high hurdles

3) getting voted out at the end of the current term, which could happen

Comment by RNUG Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:49 am
== I think the word is still banned here, ==

And I probably just used it … and git my my post trapped.

Comment by RNUG Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:51 am
==The chronic deadbeatism and deficits you favor places the burden on the relatively few.==

Never said I favored it, merely acknowledged the fact that the money comes a magical tree growing outside an abandoned mansion with no plumbing.

Comment by City Zen Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 10:59 am
I don’t need to add to what so many others have said about Rauner’s fiscally imprudent action. I will say that the JB folks continue to impress. Quality and quick responses.

Comment by Norseman Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 11:13 am
==getting voted out at the end of the current term which could happen==

Could? What would be compelling reasons to reelect? Can anyone name one?

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 11:13 am
No CZ, the money came from regularly borrowing billions in unpaid goods and services from a small number of vendors and providers, until it was spread among an exponentially larger base via the income tax.

Those two groups aren’t the same at all.

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 11:25 am
Say what you will about more taxes down the road to pay for this mess, but our leader keeps making the mess bigger. Complaints belong squarely on the one making the problem worse. As we all just continue to watch it happen………..

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 11:29 am
Bruce doesn’t like to do much/s

Comment by Flynn's mom Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 11:31 am
Was the Democratic legislature a co equal branch of government or a fence post the past two and a half years?

Is the Pritzker campaign trying to sell that Illinois finances were in tip top shape and has not had decades of unbalanced budgets prior to Rainer’s inauguration in 2015?

What are JB’s plans to balance the current unbalanced budget and reform state spending so our deficits don’t get worse?

Compelling reason to reelect Governor Rauner?

A check on the runaway spending and total control of Springfield by Democrats for the previous 12 years by a Republican Governor instead of a Pritzker rubber stamp of the Madigan legislature.

Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 11:56 am
===Compelling reason to reelect Governor Rauner?===

Bret Baier couldn’t find any…

LOL

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 12:27 pm
===Compelling reason to reelect Governor Rauner?===

Voters at a 63% disapproval of Rauner are waiting for ANY reason. They haven’t found one I guess.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 12:30 pm
Phil King: Stop with the baloney and take Rauner at his own word. Rauner has proposed two budget outlines (no actual full budget proposals), which both required at least this amount of tax revenue to come close to balancing. If we are to take him at his own word, then Rauner needed this tax increase as much as any Democrat. That is why many suspect he is ok with the new tax rate, provided he doesn’t get blamed for it.

Comment by walker Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 12:46 pm
Compelling reason to reelect Governor Rauner?

A check on the runaway spending…

That fiscal fairytale was easier to believe before his needlessly costly budget crisis.

But to be fair, I can’t blame you for trying to ignore Rauner’s dismal record in office…

– MrJM

Comment by Anonymous Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 1:00 pm
The backlog owed money has already been borrowed.
It’s just how we pay it back

Comment by titan Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 1:01 pm
Ahh, LP. Always there to prop up the victim argument. Rauner isn’t responsible for anything in your world.

==What are JB’s plans to balance the current unbalanced budget and reform state spending so our deficits don’t get worse?==

Still waiting on the Governor’s plan beyond simply not paying the bills.

==Compelling reason to reelect Governor Rauner?==

Why would I vote to re-elect a Governor into a political environment (Democratic control of the GA isn’t going away next election) where he hasn’t managed to accomplish anything?

LP - if you can tell us all how the Governor will manage to accomplish anything under the current political reality then let us know. Because I don’t see anything changing if he is re-elected. You all can play the “blame Madigan” card and the “if only they would pass his Turnaround Agenda” card all you want but it’s nothing but meaningless drivel. He has to figure out a way to work with who he’s got or he needs to be relieved of his duties.

Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 1:26 pm
I suppose I shouldn’t say he didn’t accomplish anything. Education funding reform was a start. He needs to use that model going forward.

Comment by Demoralized Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 1:28 pm
From his first budget address Governor Rauner was crystal clear.

If all the Democratic legislature wanted to do was pass a tax increase and not reform Springfield or Illinois business environment, they could use their supermajority in both legislatures and if need be convince a few Republicans to go along and do so.

Why it took 2 1/2 years to even propose that much less pass exactly that is for the Democratic legislative leaders to explain.

I guess to be fair MrJM I can’t blame you for trying to ignore the legislatures dismal performance to even agree between the two chambers for the past 2 1/2 years.

Comment by Lucky Pierre Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 1:29 pm
===From his first budget address Governor Rauner was crystal clear.===

That Rauner was grossly inept at being governor. That was quite clear, you’re right about that.

===If all the Democratic legislature wanted to do was pass a tax increase and not reform Springfield or Illinois business environment, they could use their supermajority in both legislatures and if need be convince a few Republicans to go along and do so.===

lol, … and yet, Rauner used Ken Dunkin to thwart the phony premise that there was a supermajority in the House, all the while signing social service contracts with ZERO intention on paying, hoping that the Diana Rauner “business decision” was to close, and hurt clients, just as it was designed to do.

So, there’s that…

===Why it took 2 1/2 years to even propose that much less pass exactly that is for the Democratic legislative leaders to explain.===

Bruce Rauner has yet to sign a full year budget for the state.

It’s been 3 fiscal years.

Rauner is a dismal failure, this isn’t a badge of honor, as Bret Baier, puzzled as Rauner touts his failures, “what would be different in a second term?”

Being a failure isn’t something to tout - Lucky Pierre -

Having no signed budgets is a failure. Squeezing social services and passively trying to close state universitities is Rauner destroying Illinois, and Republicans and Democrats finally had enough. Thankfully.

===I can’t blame you for trying to ignore the legislatures dismal performance to even agree between the two chambers for the past 2 1/2 years===

Rauner even refused to fund his one state agencies.

That’s not a failure, that’s someome bent on destroying a state, if Diana can get through a cocktail party without taking any blame.

Comment by Oswego Willy Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 1:38 pm
No one likes borrowing to cover deficits except for Madigan because it creates chaos which gives him power. Madigan cannot balance a budget.

Rauner is he said he could fix it and deal with Madigan, he can’t.

The only reason Rauner has a chance is Democrats will put up a billionaire who won’t even try to reign in Madigan.

One question, How will JB get Madigan to cut spending and balance the budget without tax hikes? Answer, he won’t even say he will try, which is why Rauner has a chance.

Comment by the Patriot Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 2:17 pm
“Why it took 2 1/2 years to even propose that much less pass exactly that is for the Democratic legislative leaders to explain.”

Because the governor lied to the legislative leaders.

Of both parties.

Repeatedly.

It was in all the papers, LP.

– MrJM

Comment by @MisterJayEm Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 2:22 pm
–No one likes borrowing to cover deficits except for Madigan because it creates chaos which gives him power.–

The money has already been borrowed from vendors. Why is that a difficult concept?

If I sign a contract with you to fix my porch for $500, you do it, and I don’t pay you for two year, I’ve borrowed $500 from you for two years. Get it?

Comment by wordslinger Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 2:43 pm
=The only reason Rauner has a chance is Democrats will put up a billionaire who won’t even try to reign in Madigan.=

The Supreme Court has shown it’s capable of reigning-in Madigan he tried a patently unconstitutional pension rip-off of public employees. Which Lisa Madigan supported too. You can also ask Biss and Nekritz about this too.

Comment by the Traitor Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 2:45 pm
Adding to OW, lets not forget had Rauner supported the prior inc tax rate all along and not allowed it to expire; the current inc tax would be much lower and we would not have lost so many small businesses. So Rauner is the cause of the higher inc tax and loss of business

Comment by Ghost Thursday, Sep 21, 17 @ 3:13 pm